More evidence that the TNT, while proliferating blogs left and right, doesn’t know how to integrate them into their traditional news structure.

Access to the Bridge should be direct, line of sight, and open. The History Museum can use visual cues to bring people down that way. The whole orientation as it stands, combined with the old Museum Cafe structure, is convoluted. Please, let’s acknowledge the natural flow of pedestrian traffic—not channel it.

Seems the wall, if needed could flank the passage in a North/South direction?

I think you mean an east – west direction as Pacific runs north and south.

Yes, I think the best structure would be a large archway from Pacific Avenue opening widely toward the bridge of glass. The donor wall could be on the side.

If visitors to Tacoma have taken the time and effort to drive down to Pacific Avenue with the intention of seeing the Chihuly Bridge of Glass and the Glass Museum, it would be gracious of the City of Tacoma to permit them to do so in a direct manner.

As far as for the History Museum, it should concentrate on having attactive exhibits to draw patrons.

Trying to force visitors to enter their establishment who instead desire to cross the Bridge of Glass to see the Glass Museum or the Foss Waterway isn’t legitimate.

Plus, I don’t think it really works and it only frustrates everyone.

All it does is make it hard for visitors to go to their desired destination over the bridge.

For local Tacomans, the wall makes it hard to get to the Foss Waterway and makes them less likely to do so.

This is really a non-debatable issue.

There are 100 books on the importance of pedestrian friendly streets and pathways.

Did I read that right? The History Museum is spending $70,000 to build a wall to thank donors who gave a total of $5000. Take the plaques that were going to be installed on the wall and place them along the bare wall along the back of the Cafe. Then Everybody walking through the passage way will see the wall of honor.

The view of the bridge is not secondary – it goes hand-in-hand with ease of pedestrian access. If ease of access is the primary goal.

This whole thing reminds me of a funny and interesting conversation I had with Charlie over at Metro Coffee a year or two ago which stemmed from the topic of access to the bridge and covered the Northwest tradition of not making it easy for outsiders to find things. For the longest time, directions and signage to landmarks like Pt. Defiance were either non-existent or done in such a way as to not be noticed.

Now, imagine yourself a visitor from out of town and you were trying to find the Bridge of Glass only to be greeted by a tall black iron gate. How would this make you feel? Frustrated to say the least! If you didn’t see other people walking across the bridge you would probably assume that the bridge was closed and turn away.

Downtown has changed greatly since the Museum was built. Those who had the vision to build the Museum, restore Union Station, and create UWT should be commended. But the need for a gate at the entrance to the bridge has passed. And the time for a more open and public process has arrived.

I guess it’s not as good as border volleyball, but anyone up for a game of donor wall volleyball if the thing does get build?

If the lighting is good down there, it can be a winter replacement for bocce!

I live in Parkland and I have a salon on Union and Highway 16 so I don’t get downtown too often. But everytime I have company from out of town I take them to the various museums downtown. I usually park at the Parking garage at the Freighthousesquare and take the link to the Museums. When you cross Pacific from the platform you walk right underneath the Arch between the cafe and the museum. If I am determined to go to the glass museum I will not go into the History Museum even though I am close to their front door. So the argument the director of the museum makes: >>Today, the History Museum defends the wall:
Opening up the area would put a ‘dagger in the heart of the business interests of the Museum” (TNT 9/28)>> is totally ludicrous. People go where they want to go.

Since I opened my Salon on Union Ave and 31st St. some 20 years ago I thought it would be wonderful if I could redirect traffic through the alley behind my building because that is where the entrance to my building is, right next to the parking lot. But I am not so stupid as to think that most of those people driving by would stop and come in because now they would be closer to my entrance. I hope I made my point.

I often wondered why there was a fence at the end of the bridge of glass. When you are done visiting the museum of glass and want to go over to the Tacoma Art Museum you have to first go back towards the History Museum to get out through the Arch.

We need fewer barriers where ever we go, whether they be fences or brick walls.

As an earlier poster – I think it was Erik – suggested an Arch at the end of the bridge leading out to the sidewalk on Pacific and a display wall for the plaques leading towards the bridge from the sidewalk or arching around towards the History Museum would be a much better solution and people would probably stop to read the inscriptions instead of just walking past them on the sidewalk. Also, there are the huge empty walls of the History Museum already facing the sidewalk. Why couldn’t the plaques be attached there?
Aren’t there any architects in Tacoma? Why do we have to have an architect from Texas to design a WALL in Tacoma? That is how donated money gets wasted. I won’t spend any more of my money at the History Museum as long as they have this director with his attitude in place.

Another thing I read in the News Tribune and here are the comments made by the Public Works Department. Does anyone know what happens to a Permit when one is applied for at the city? Why don’t all of the departments involved about a particular issue know about it now that the city owns the ‘superdooper’- all inclusive – all knowing – millions of dollars plunder – computer???
I also wonder how many city workers and Public Works employees have passed by the worksite of the wall and why they might not have shared with other workers and their superiors what they observed. When I drive around town I tend to notice when work is in progress somewhere and I wonder what might be built.

I agree with the work stop order but I am sorry for the cost overruns that will most likely result from this. We have to remember that people have donated their hard earned money and now it is being squandered.
I think the fault lies with both the city and the History Museum. Ultimately the city is responsible to make life more pleasant and easier for its citizens and visitors and someone in cityhall should negotiate an opening at the end of the bridge of glass so people would have easier access to the other side of the railroad tracks and to the water front.

I’m not a fan of walls next to sidewalks. But then I don’t like surface parking lots next to them either. In the case of a red brick donor wall, I think it could be worse. It also always seemed a bit creepy looking at the bridge and the courthouse through bars.

I have a hunch that what folks will discover is that the concrete pavers inside the fence are the roof tiles for the auditorium below. The fence prevents a heavy vehicle from getting onto them, since heavy vehicles do not belong on roofs or for that matter on glass bridges.

I was amazed that somebody drove their car down the 19th Street stairway on the UWT campus. Amazed that is until another dare devil accomplished the same feat on the Spanish Steps.

And now I am experiencing the truely bizarre feeling that I am making perfect sense to traffic engineers and pratically nobody else.

Here’s an idea…Build a huge fence or wall around downtown as a whole and have admission gates. Treat the entire area around it like a fair or circus then the museums and everything else could be free. If the wall were made of brick, each one could have a taxpayer name on it honor all of us who paid for the insane thing! Ok, maybe it’s time to get a cup of coffee!

I don’t see how the museum’s business will be hurt by opening up the fence. It seems the history museum is a destination where people already plan to go, where as the bridge of glass links pedestrians to Tacomas Foss Waterway (which many outsiders probably don’t even realize is there). I have a feeling if this wall gets built, it will be torn down 15-20 years from now in another attempt to link the waterfront to the downtown….

Blocking the flow of energy will not.

Good point. A brick wall blocking pedestrian access and the view to the water violates about every successful city design technique there is.

1. Pedestrian traffic. Longer distances to destinations reduces the foot traffic, the lifeblood of a city which the Foss merchants need much more of.

2. View corridors to water. These are highly prized by all and need to stay open whenever possible. The brick wall would squander this city asset.

3. Navigation. People who can see a structure from Pacific Avenue are more likely to know where it is and travel to it.

4. Crime prevention. Solid walls are highly disfavored as they hide criminal activity and make them hard to monitor an area. Pedestrians and others will not be able to view the area making them less likely to travel late at night.

5. Attactiveness. People on Pacific, UWT in the area want to be able to see out to the water. Open views, especially of a waterway are like gold.

6. Disability access. Adding an additional unnecesary 230 feet loop makes it more difficult for people with mobility issues to get from Pacific Avenue to the Chihuly Bridge of Glass.

There isn’t much of a counter argument I have seen other than it was already designed. The donor wall can be placed perpendicular to the street to not impede traffic.

The history museum and the glass museum need to try to attract patrons based on their exhibits they have, not by trying to erect walls around the other to force people to walk by.

The city needs to likely pay some money for the supplies already used in the foundation and other expended costs and ensure the easement that the city already has is properly used by being wide open.

It is kind of interesting how different arms of the TNT weighed in on the proposed brick wall/bridge of glass issue this week.

The editorial board focused on the easement that the city retains entitling Tacomans direct access to the bridge:

The easement issue is significant. The city negotiated it in 1990 as part of the deal that deeded the property to the museum. . . The History Museum and its architects share the blame for the present situation.

The Nose, the author of which has often been a mystery, was sent in to address the situation more bluntly yet satirecly:

We already did the Reagan “tear down this wall” riff a couple of years back, when Washington State History Museum director David Nicandri put up his fence.

What if Nicandri, the William F. Buckley of museum bosses (“we intend to roll back the stop-work order with as much dispatch as we can muster,”) appeared before the City Council and channeled actor Samuel L. Jackson: “I’m tired of these mother#$%! delays with this mother#$%! wall!!”

Then finally, GritCity gave weighed in on the Museum’s questionable marketing strategy:

As part of a national deal day for cheapskates, enjoy free admission to the Tacoma Art Museum and the Washington State History Museum. Download the required pass here. We’ll see if free admission works better than a blockade to funnel people through the doors.

The city was wise to retain an easement directly from Pacific Ave. directly to the bridge of glass. The History Museum needs to work with the city while it exercises its right for pedestrians to pass. They seem to greatly underestimate how much Tacomans value easy pedestrian access to the Foss Wateway and the Bridge of Glass.

Nearly everyone who has walked down to the Bridge of Glass opposes the loss of pedestrian access by a brick or any other type of wall.

Today, Peter Callahan adds his voice:

The city asks, How come the museum didn’t note on the permit applications that the wall was on a city easement designed to preserve access between Pacific Avenue and the Bridge of Glass?

I tried to imagine a wall filling that gap – even one with an opening, or aperture as the architects call it. I could. I tried to figure a good reason why it made sense. I couldn’t. It might be the most beautiful wall in the county, designed by a nationally renowned architect, and it would never be anything more than a wall.

Paul Ellis weighs in from the Tacoma Pierce County Chamber of Commerce and refers to the structure as the ‘wall of shame’

When I mentioned to several longtime Museum of Glass staffers that a contingent is worried about pedestrians not finding the Bridge of Glass, they just laughed. (Now Museum patrons finding their way from the MOG front doors up to the Bridge, that’s a different issue entirely!)

The proposed sign for the wall makes the history museum a reasonable bullseye for criticism in the current debate.

People have only been critical because the proposed wall would unnessarily block all pedestrian traffic as well as the views.

Nearly everyone who has looked this including The Tacoma Pierce County Chamber of Commerce, TNT editorial board, columnists have explained in detail why this is such a bad idea. Somehow the message is not getting through to the Museum.

On a practical basis, the new wall should prevent private vehicles from traveling onto the bridge

As has been pointed out before by others, you don’t need a brick wall to stop vehicular traffic, a few planters will do. This allows pedestrians to still pass. The county courthouse has done this well as well as many other places in Tacoma.

The donor wall is a wonderful way to remember volunteers who kept alive a once-fanciful vision for the restoration of Union Station

Yes. A case has been made for a donor wall but not one that obscures the view of the water, the bridge of glass and forces pedestrians to walk a couple hundred feet to try to reach the bridge of glass.

Why can’t the donor wall be turned 90 degrees and be against the cafe wall where there is already a nice brick wall that won’t obstruct traffic?

Perhaps this is edging even more off the topic ( Please delete if this is inappropriate)… but what Droid16 said reminds me of something a friend enlightened me about regarding Seattle public spaces (I hope I get this right): I don’t know if Tacoma has anything similar in its codes, but for a long time, the Seattle Municipal code has had a trade-off advantages for providing Public Benefit Features (PBF’s). The end result for the general public (us) is that there are many public spaces in Seattle (many totally hidden) that may be enjoyed, if only one knows where to look. For the most part there are no signs pointing to them – it’s like a treasure hunt finding them. I believe this is the Seattle Minucipal Code and a map of the pBF’s, and if you haven’t had enough,a 2000 .pdf audit report on Seattle’s PBF’s. Anyway, it’s like knowing about something no one else knows about, and I like the idea of me getting something in the trade-off (although some of the spaces are just token spaces). What do you think? :-)

Took me a minute to figure out how to view it.. but to view the pic right click and save pic then open from your computer.. Pretty funny.. lol

I’ve followed this story in the paper and on exit133 with some interest.

There has been much reference to the “outcry” from concerned citizens in this blog, yet I can only identify a handful of people (most are posting here) who are upset about this addition to our downtown. I’m not convinced this is a true “outcry.”

Re: the recently posted pic. It’s fascinating to watch grown men act like baboons when they think they can do so without consequence. The maturity level of this group of “anti-wall” boys is null. Congratulations on your efforts to make Century Park, which will be a wonderful addition to our downtown area, the equivalent of your own personal bathroom joke.

You have not demonstrated any kind of civic responsibility or maturity, and both the History Museum and the City of Tacoma should ignore your screeching.

I look forward to another park in Tacoma- particularly one that honors the people who had the vision to fight for the renovation of Union Station. Without them, our downtown core could still be the wasteland it was a little over a decade ago. And, if it was, I’m sure these ‘anti-wall” boys would be screeching about something else somewhere else.

I say Bravo to Mr. Anderson for his wall/moat photo mash-up. Contrary to the “baboon” remark I think it shows that there’s nothing like a little comedy to get a real point across. To some, any wall completely blocking pedestrian access to and from the Bridge of Glass is absurd and, in our imaginations, may be seen as just as hostile and controlling as the illustration he created.

Besides, no one likes to be the butt of a political cartoon or illustration such as this. Fortunately, in our democratic society, it’s A-OK. Bravo for the nice work Mr. Anderson as I think you’ve successfully made a powerful point without any name-calling or slander. Last time I checked, I’m pretty sure walls don’t have any feelings to hurt. ;)